IntroComp reviews, part 1: Lair of the Gorgolath, Voltage Cafe, Walker's Rift

I should've gotten through IntroComp earlier, but at least I got around to it, eh? We'll start with these three, and I'll post the other tomorrow.

Hopefully my reviews will have something new to say or, if they don't, help act as a deciding vote/deciding motivation for an author to say "I need to do this, or that."

I've avoided other reviews, so there may be repetition, but I think I'll be less biased that way. In the past, I sometimes poked at reviews to see how long/short a game is, to organize my own time, but that spoiled a lot more. (Note to IFDB admins or anyone: I think this would be a good feature to put in for a game. Have people vote on how long a game seems to take. I know lots of times I'd like to sit down with a game but I have no clue how long it is.)

If you haven't gotten through IntroComp, you have one more day. No game is terribly long, except for one that has a walkthrough anyway. (Note: walkthroughs are a good thing, in-game or not. Authors, even if you want people to see the bad ending or not be spoon-fed, maybe put the "right" path at the end? Or say so to start?)

I hope it's not rough to say these missed the cut for my top 3, but they had enough that it's worth saying a bit. I'd have said a bit more if I'd have started earlier.

Tales of the Soul Thief, by David Whyld

So, yeah, this may not be the most momentous thing to post to planet-if (I'll probably lump the other games I didn't test in groups of 2 or 3--or maybe all 5)--but seriously, IntroComp is worth looking into, if you haven't. You have about two more weeks. There are some good games. Even those that aren't, can be good.

I've been busy releasing Threediopolis and getting close to Shuffling Around thanks to some great work by Sean Shore...it's taken a lot out of me, and in fact I even forgot to bump back my post-dated IFComp review index, but I find re-releases worth it, to get rid of obvious bugs and trip-ups.

I hope IntroComp authors find it in them to release something post-introcomp, even if it's not fully complete. It'd be nice to see results, small or bing--I know Akkoteaque had some good bug fixes and believe it will get done, and get done well--and speaking from experience, it's nice to know I've fixed bugs and worked to improve something I wrote, even if the bugs were dumb in the first place.

Like the header says, I'm going to start with David Whyld's Tales of the Soul Thief. It's more serious than most of his efforts. He entered Best Laid Plans last year, and I was hoping he would finish it, because it was amusing and had a lot of things to do, and a lot of places it could go, too.

Spoiler: this is a bit harsh on him as he has the talent and work to improve the game, but as it stands, there was a lot to struggle through. While the game was paced well, and the world was believable, the technical side comes up a bit short. Still, I'd be interested to see how, where and when you can use your skill--for good or evil. Even allowing both, or having a Cliff's Notes at the end for those who don't want to replay, would augment the story greatly.

IntroComp Introduction

So there are ten games in IntroComp, which is the second-most behind 2011. Thanks again to Jacqueline Ashwell for organizing this and for regular communication with prospective authors--and for extending the deadline--and congratulations to those who entered. I had an idea for a game this year, but I didn't write enough for people to look at. It's the same game as last year, but fortunately, the reason it was delayed was...other games.

TL/DR: I want to make time to play and judge these games, and I hope you can, too, even if you cannot hit them all!
I see some familiar authors and some new authors, and there seems to be a good variety of genres, and the blurbs all look pretty strong.

I managed to test 4 of the games, and I'll discuss them with minimal comment, because I want to avoid seeming like I am canvassing for votes in the authors' places. I will review them once IntroComp is over. The usual vanilla things about authors getting back to me and improving stuff apply here--I think the process went well. These games are:

* Going Down, by Hanon Ondricek
* Hornets' Nest, by Jason Lautzenheiser
* The Scroll Thief: A Tribute to the Enchanter Trilogy, by Daniel M. Stelzer
* The Terrible Doubt of Appearances, by Buster Hudson

The last two were with people I hadn't worked with before, which is a valuable and good experience. I wasn't able to give Scroll Thief as much attention as I hoped, but that was more due to my managing time poorly. GD is an inklewriter game, originally written in Inform 7 (from a very early draft,) and the other three are Inform 7. I will have general evaluations after August 15th.

The six I plan to review during the contest are

1st and the Last of the Ninja, by nmelssx
Bridges and Balloons, by Molly Geene (Greene?)
The Cuckold's Egg, by Veronica Devon
The Devil in the Details, by Jerry Ford
Mount Imperius, by kaleidofish
Tales of the Soul Thief, by David Whyld

That leaves a review every five days.

When I test for an author, it often opens up ways to make my game clearer, or things to check on. And that helps, long-term. So I encourage anyone to make time to test at least one game for IFComp, or for sending feedback to anyone whose work supports scripting. For instance, TRANSCRIPT on an Inform game gives a transcript. For the InkleWriter game, you can cut/paste the entire text from the web browser. Authors (the ones serious about improving) do appreciate things, and the more feedback they get, the more IntroComp is likely to spawn a cool game.

One other thing about feedback--it helps you with your own stuff. To indulge in minor self-promotion. After the deadline, I cleaned up a lot in each of Shuffling Around, A Roiling Original and Threediopolis. (I've still got stuff to do. If anyone is interested in general abuse testing, I'd be grateful, and I'd be glad to trade testing efforts. I have a tester for ARO who is finding neat stuff and spurring a lot of features, but there can always be one more. You don't have to be terribly technical or adept to test things.)